I thought the piece was a crock. But, whatever.
However. If the Irish Times is as serious about "free speech" and the alleged facilitation of constructive debate as it has purported to be, it ought to have printed the piece, unchanged, in the days after its online debut (as planned).
The failure to print is the only evidence that there was anything other than consensus at the paper as to the merit of Pell's piece and the soundness of the editorial judgment that led to its publication. Which is interesting! To me.